Debate contribution: Justice Bill: Consideration Stage
Debate contribution by Ms Emma Sheerin on .
- MLA
- Ms Emma Sheerin
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 15 June 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- Justice Bill: Consideration Stage
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5615035
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I will always be careful with my language, so apologies if "used" was not the right term. "Stood with", "encouraged", "raised hands with" or whatever phraseology you want to use, the fact is that the DUP stood in a line with masked men to criticise grannies marching against the genocide in Gaza, and, then, a few days later, when it no longer suited the narrative, the DUP criticised masked men who were burning people out of their homes because of the colour of their skin. I used that example on the basis that you should exercise caution. You have been used — we all know that you have been used — and that is sad for you, but it is really sad for the children of the North of Ireland, who this legislation would have protected. That is the reality.
Yes, I will.
A LeasCheann Comhairle,
I do not require a delay. This is a farce and an abuse of parliamentary procedures, and I am no longer taking part. Slán.
170 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Uncertain: close call Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers
Uncertain: this record is published but not counted in any total.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.82 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- Criteria met: Identity framing (0.63).
- The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.64).
- Subject area: Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers.
- The answers did not meet either automatic threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.63 | Yes |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.24 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.09 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.46 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.50 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.12 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.82 | Above qualifying threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.18 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.64 |
| Adopts it | 0.17 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers | 0.61 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.28 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.03 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.03 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:57 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.